Having duplicate PV problems, think there's a bug in LVM2 md component detection
I'm sorry if this is a FAQ or if I'm being stupid. I saw some mentions to this problem on the old mailing list, but it didn't seem to quite cover what I'm seeing, and I don't see an archive for this list yet. (and what on earth happened to the old list, anyway?)
My problem is this: I'm setting up a software RAID5 across 5 IDE drives. I'm running Debian Unstable, using kernel 2.6.8-2-k7. I HAVE set md_component_detection to 1 in lvm.conf, and I wiped the drives after changing this setting.
I originally set it up as a four-drive RAID, via a 3Ware controller, so my original devices were sdb, sdc, sdd, and sde. (the machine also has a hardware raid on an ICP Vortex SCSI controller: this is sda.) In this mode, it set up and built perfectly. LVM worked exactly as I expected it to. I had a test volume running. All the queries and volume management worked exactly correctly. All was well.
So then I tried to add one more drive via the motherboard IDE controller, on /dev/hda. (note that I stopped the array, wiped the first and last 100 megs on the drives, and rebuilt. ). That's when the problems started. The RAID itself seems to build and work just fine, although I haven't waited for the entire 6 or so hours it will take to completely finish. Build speed is good, everything seems normal. But LVM blows up badly in this configuration.
When I do a pvcreate on /dev/md0, it succeeds... but if I do a pvdisplay I get a bunch of complaints:
jeeves:/etc/lvm# pvdisplay Found duplicate PV y8pYTtAg0W703Sc8Wiy79mcWU3gHmCFc: using /dev/sde not /dev/hda Found duplicate PV y8pYTtAg0W703Sc8Wiy79mcWU3gHmCFc: using /dev/sde not /dev/hda --- NEW Physical volume --- PV Name /dev/hda VG Name PV Size 931.54 GB Allocatable NO PE Size (KByte) 0 Total PE 0 Free PE 0 Allocated PE 0 PV UUID y8pYTt-Ag0W-703S-c8Wi-y79m-cWU3-gHmCFc
It seems to think that /dev/hda is where the PV is, rather than /dev/md0.
(Note, again, I *HAVE* turned the md_component_detection to 1 in lvm.conf!!)
I have erased, using dd, the first and last 100 megs or so on every drive, and I get exactly the same results every time... even with all RAID and LVM blocks erased, if I use this list of drives:
/dev/hda/dev/sdb/dev/sdc/dev/sdd/dev/sde
with the linux MD driver, LVM does not seem to work properly. I think the component detection is at least a little buggy. This is what my /proc/mdstat looks like:
jeeves:/etc/lvm# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid5]
md0 : active raid5 sde[5] sdd[3] sdc[2] sdb[1] hda[0]
976793600 blocks level 5, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/4] [UUUU_]
[=>...................] recovery = 6.2% (15208576/244198400)
finish=283.7min speed=13448K/sec
unused devices: <none>I realize that using both IDE and SCSI drives in the same array is unusual... but I'm not really using SCSI drives, they just look like that because of the 3Ware controller.
Again, this works FINE as long as I just use the (fake) SCSI devices.. it doesn't wonk out until I add in /dev/hda.
Any suggestions? Is this a bug?
I'm anly a begginer at lvm but...
Quoted 25 lines · Ron Watkins
I'm sorry if this is a FAQ or if I'm being stupid. I saw some mentions to this problem on the old mailing list, but it didn't seem to quite cover what I'm seeing, and I don't see an archive for this list yet. (and what on earth happened to the old list, anyway?)
My problem is this: I'm setting up a software RAID5 across 5 IDE drives.
I'm running Debian Unstable, using kernel 2.6.8-2-k7. I HAVE setmd_component_detectionto 1 in lvm.conf, and I wiped the drives after changing this setting.I originally set it up as a four-drive RAID, via a 3Ware controller, so my original devices were sdb, sdc, sdd, and sde. (the machine also has a
hardware raid on an ICP Vortex SCSI controller: this is sda.) In this
mode, it set up and built perfectly. LVM worked exactly as I expected it to. I had a test volume running. All the queries and volume management worked exactly correctly. All was well.So then I tried to add one more drive via the motherboard IDE controller, on
/dev/hda. (note that I stopped the array, wiped the first and last 100 megs on the drives, and rebuilt. ). That's when the problems started. The RAID itself seems to build and work just fine, although I haven't waited for the entire 6 or so hours it will take to completely finish. Build speed is good, everything seems normal. But LVM blows up badly in this configuration.
Quoted 8 lines
When I do a pvcreate on
/dev/md0, it succeeds... but if I do a pvdisplay I get a bunch of complaints:jeeves:/etc/lvm# pvdisplay Found duplicate PV y8pYTtAg0W703Sc8Wiy79mcWU3gHmCFc: using /dev/sde not /dev/hda Found duplicate PV y8pYTtAg0W703Sc8Wiy79mcWU3gHmCFc: using /dev/sde not /dev/hda
I think you have 2 PV's with the same UUID and that's the problem. You can even move the drives letters around (hda or sda) as I think it does not matter for lvm. The only thing it counts it's the "UUID" of the PV.
You should use pvcreate again on /dev/hda so your last added drive should have different UUID.
Quoted 52 lines
--- NEW Physical volume ---
PV Name/dev/hda
VG NamePV Size 931.54 GB Allocatable NO PE Size (KByte) 0 Total PE 0 Free PE 0 Allocated PE 0 PV UUID y8pYTt-Ag0W-703S-c8Wi-y79m-cWU3-gHmCFcIt seems to think that
/dev/hdais where the PV is, rather than/dev/md0.(Note, again, I *HAVE* turned the
md_component_detectionto 1 in lvm.conf!!)I have erased, using dd, the first and last 100 megs or so on every drive, and I get exactly the same results every time... even with all RAID and LVM blocks erased, if I use this list of drives:
/dev/hda/dev/sdb/dev/sdc/dev/sdd/dev/sdewith the linux MD driver, LVM does not seem to work properly. I think the component detection is at least a little buggy. This is what my
/proc/mdstatlooks like:jeeves:/etc/lvm# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid5] md0 : active raid5 sde[5] sdd[3] sdc[2] sdb[1] hda[0] 976793600 blocks level 5, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/4] [UUUU_] [=>...................] recovery = 6.2% (15208576/244198400) finish=283.7min speed=13448K/sec unused devices: <none>I realize that using both IDE and SCSI drives in the same array is unusual... but I'm not really using SCSI drives, they just look like that because of the 3Ware controller.
Again, this works FINE as long as I just use the (fake) SCSI devices.. it doesn't wonk out until I add in
/dev/hda.Any suggestions? Is this a bug?
_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
Yes, I have two PVs with the same UUID. The problem is that these PVs are COMPONENTS OF an MD device. So when pvcreate writes its superblock to md0, it gets mirrored onto all the components of md0. Later runs elicit much complaining because /dev/hda and several /dev/sd devices now have the 'same' UUID. They're SUPPOSED to, they're components of a RAID.
LVM is supposed to detect this situation and not do that, but it doesn't seem to be working for me.
<<RON>>
----- Original Message ----- From: "go0ogl3" <[email protected]>
To: "LVM general discussion and development" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 6:15 AM
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Having duplicate PV problems,think there's a bug in LVM2 md component detection
Quoted 104 lines
I'm anly a begginer at lvm but...
Quoted 25 lines · Ron Watkins
I'm sorry if this is a FAQ or if I'm being stupid. I saw some mentions to this problem on the old mailing list, but it didn't seem to quite cover what I'm seeing, and I don't see an archive for this list yet. (and what on earth happened to the old list, anyway?)
My problem is this: I'm setting up a software RAID5 across 5 IDE drives.
I'm running Debian Unstable, using kernel 2.6.8-2-k7. I HAVE setmd_component_detectionto 1 in lvm.conf, and I wiped the drives after changing this setting.I originally set it up as a four-drive RAID, via a 3Ware controller, so my original devices were sdb, sdc, sdd, and sde. (the machine also has a
hardware raid on an ICP Vortex SCSI controller: this is sda.) In this
mode, it set up and built perfectly. LVM worked exactly as I expected it to. I had a test volume running. All the queries and volume management worked exactly correctly. All was well.So then I tried to add one more drive via the motherboard IDE controller, on
/dev/hda. (note that I stopped the array, wiped the first and last 100 megs on the drives, and rebuilt. ). That's when the problems started. The RAID itself seems to build and work just fine, although I haven't waited for the entire 6 or so hours it will take to completely finish. Build speed is good, everything seems normal. But LVM blows up badly in this configuration.Quoted 8 lines
When I do a pvcreate on
/dev/md0, it succeeds... but if I do a pvdisplay I get a bunch of complaints:jeeves:/etc/lvm# pvdisplay Found duplicate PV y8pYTtAg0W703Sc8Wiy79mcWU3gHmCFc: using /dev/sde not /dev/hda Found duplicate PV y8pYTtAg0W703Sc8Wiy79mcWU3gHmCFc: using /dev/sde not /dev/hdaI think you have 2 PV's with the same UUID and that's the problem. You can even move the drives letters around (hda or sda) as I think it does not matter for lvm. The only thing it counts it's the "UUID" of the PV.
You should use pvcreate again on
/dev/hdaso your last added drive should have different UUID.Quoted 44 lines
--- NEW Physical volume ---
PV Name/dev/hda
VG NamePV Size 931.54 GB Allocatable NO PE Size (KByte) 0 Total PE 0 Free PE 0 Allocated PE 0 PV UUID y8pYTt-Ag0W-703S-c8Wi-y79m-cWU3-gHmCFcIt seems to think that
/dev/hdais where the PV is, rather than/dev/md0.(Note, again, I *HAVE* turned the
md_component_detectionto 1 in lvm.conf!!)I have erased, using dd, the first and last 100 megs or so on every drive, and I get exactly the same results every time... even with all RAID and LVM blocks erased, if I use this list of drives:
/dev/hda/dev/sdb/dev/sdc/dev/sdd/dev/sdewith the linux MD driver, LVM does not seem to work properly. I think the component detection is at least a little buggy. This is what my
/proc/mdstatlooks like:jeeves:/etc/lvm# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid5] md0 : active raid5 sde[5] sdd[3] sdc[2] sdb[1] hda[0] 976793600 blocks level 5, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/4] [UUUU_] [=>...................] recovery = 6.2% (15208576/244198400) finish=283.7min speed=13448K/sec unused devices: <none>I realize that using both IDE and SCSI drives in the same array is unusual... but I'm not really using SCSI drives, they just look like that because of the 3Ware controller.
Again, this works FINE as long as I just use the (fake) SCSI devices.. it doesn't wonk out until I add in
/dev/hda.Quoted 8 lines
Any suggestions? Is this a bug?
_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
Quoted 4 lines · Ron Watkins
Yes, I have two PVs with the same UUID. The problem is that these PVs are COMPONENTS OF an MD device. So when pvcreate writes its superblock to md0, it gets mirrored onto all the components of md0. Later runs elicit much complaining because
/dev/hdaand several/dev/sddevices now have the 'same' UUID. They're SUPPOSED to, they're components of a RAID.LVM is supposed to detect this situation and not do that, but it doesn't seem to be working for me.
i wonder if it is a problem with largefile access ?!? which version of lvm2 are you using?
does debian patch it?
can you try stracing it an look for seeks, so we can see if it is wrapping around somewhere?
L.
Signature · 6 lines
Luca Berra -- [email protected] Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \
Due to another failing hard drive, I was forced to just use the md0 device directly and put it into use. Once I have the dying drive replaced, I might be able to clear the data off again if you want to do a specific set of tests, but that would take many hours. (150+ gigs over Fast Ethernet, not a quick process). So please be sure you need me to do this, if you do.
I am using LVM version 2.01.04 (2005-02-09). The Library Version is 1.01.00-ioctl (2005-01-17). The Driver Version is 4.1.0. (no date given). I don't have any easy way to determine if the Debian maintainer is patching this. Should I be submitting the bug report directly to him/her/them instead?
I'm not sure how to strace... I see the strace command. I assume I'd have to strace the pvcreate and pvdisplay, meaning I'd need to move my data again first. If you do want me to do this, I can start copying data off late tomorrow, and can probably do the actual test on Wednesday. I'll need the exact command line you want used, however, since I don't know anything about strace.
<<RON>>
jeeves:~# lvm version LVM version: 2.01.04 (2005-02-09) Library version: 1.01.00-ioctl (2005-01-17) Driver version: 4.1.0
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luca Berra" <[email protected]>
To: "LVM general discussion and development" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Having duplicate PV problems,think there's a bug in LVM2 md component detection
Quoted 27 lines · Ron Watkins
Quoted 4 lines
Yes, I have two PVs with the same UUID. The problem is that these PVs are COMPONENTS OF an MD device. So when pvcreate writes its superblock to md0, it gets mirrored onto all the components of md0. Later runs elicit much complaining because
/dev/hdaand several/dev/sddevices now have the 'same' UUID. They're SUPPOSED to, they're components of a RAID.LVM is supposed to detect this situation and not do that, but it doesn't seem to be working for me.
i wonder if it is a problem with largefile access ?!? which version of lvm2 are you using?
does debian patch it?
can you try stracing it an look for seeks, so we can see if it is wrapping around somewhere?L.
Signature · 12 lines
Luca Berra -- [email protected] Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \ _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
Quoted 1 line · Ron Watkins
I am using LVM version 2.01.04 (2005-02-09). The Library Version is 1.01.00-ioctl (2005-01-17). The Driver Version is 4.1.0. (no date given). I don't have any easy way to determine if the Debian maintainer is patching
http://packages.debian.org/lvm2
Quoted 1 line
this. Should I be submitting the bug report directly to him/her/them instead?
well, they do explicitely add -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 to CFLAGS i wonder if this changes the lseek behaviour
i'd try asking the debian maintainer first....
L.
Signature · 6 lines
Luca Berra -- [email protected] Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \
Quoted 11 lines · Ron Watkins
I'm running Debian Unstable, using kernel 2.6.8-2-k7. I HAVE set
md_component_detectionto 1 in lvm.conf, and I wiped the drives after changing this setting.Found duplicate PV y8pYTtAg0W703Sc8Wiy79mcWU3gHmCFc: using
/dev/sdenot/dev/hda
Found duplicate PV y8pYTtAg0W703Sc8Wiy79mcWU3gHmCFc: using/dev/sdenot/dev/hdaIt seems to think that
/dev/hdais where the PV is, rather than/dev/md0. (Note, again, I *HAVE* turned themd_component_detectionto 1 in lvm.conf!!)
Add verbose flags:
vgscan -vvvv
and post a URL to the output.
Add in your configuration: lvm.conf, pvs -av plus full details of your md configuration (eg various mdadm options).
Alasdair
Signature · 1 line
[email protected]
Quoted 9 lines · Ron Watkins
I'm sorry if this is a FAQ or if I'm being stupid. I saw some mentions to this problem on the old mailing list, but it didn't seem to quite cover what I'm seeing, and I don't see an archive for this list yet. (and what on earth happened to the old list, anyway?)
My problem is this: I'm setting up a software RAID5 across 5 IDE
drives. I'm running Debian Unstable, using kernel 2.6.8-2-k7. I HAVE
setmd_component_detectionto 1 in lvm.conf, and I wiped the drives after changing this setting.
I just had the same problem. As a workaround I set up a filter in lvm.conf in devices{} like:
filter = [ "a|^/dev/md.*|", "r/.*/" ]
And that works fine.
Matthias